From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jamal Hadi Salim Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v8 2/3] net sched actions: dump more than TCA_ACT_MAX_PRIO actions per batch Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2017 09:42:31 -0400 Message-ID: <5377f9a5-56db-537d-1079-ead60b67c71e@mojatatu.com> References: <20170426061904.GB1867@nanopsycho.orion> <8f1a1b14-ad9b-7840-1fa6-04f2a2e4f55d@mojatatu.com> <20170426120851.GE1867@nanopsycho.orion> <10fe2c22-8e76-543e-dd24-ddce5813ab69@mojatatu.com> <20170426135627.GI1867@nanopsycho.orion> <20170427063039.GB1870@nanopsycho.orion> <20170428070207.GC1886@nanopsycho.orion> <09120c61-cbdc-f048-d7bb-268e5af3e92d@mojatatu.com> <20170428132115.GD1886@nanopsycho.orion> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: davem@davemloft.net, xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com, eric.dumazet@gmail.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, Simon Horman , Benjamin LaHaise To: Jiri Pirko Return-path: Received: from mail-io0-f196.google.com ([209.85.223.196]:36686 "EHLO mail-io0-f196.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1423535AbdD1Nme (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Apr 2017 09:42:34 -0400 Received: by mail-io0-f196.google.com with SMTP id x86so11206289ioe.3 for ; Fri, 28 Apr 2017 06:42:34 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20170428132115.GD1886@nanopsycho.orion> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 17-04-28 09:21 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote: > Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 02:30:17PM CEST, jhs@mojatatu.com wrote: >> On 17-04-28 03:02 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote: >>> Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 03:22:53AM CEST, jhs@mojatatu.com wrote: >> >> [..] >>>> Maybe I am misunderstanding: >>>> Recall, this is what it looks like with this patchset: >>>> [TCA_ROOT_XXXX] >>>> >>>> TCA_ROOT_XXX is very subsystem specific. classifiers, qdiscs and many >>>> subsystems defined their own semantics for that TLV level. This specific >>>> "dump max" is very very specific to actions. They were crippled by the >>>> fact you could only send 32 at a time - this allows more to be sent. >>> >>> All I suggest is to replace NLA_U32 flags you want that does not >>> have any semantics with NLA_FLAGS flags, which eventually will carry >>> the exact same u32, but with predefined semantics, helpers, everything. >>> >> >> I didnt understand fully Jiri. Are you suggesting a new type called >> NLA_FLAGS which is re-usable elsewhere? > > Exactly. That's what I'm saying. > If you want to make it general: I see the semantics of this thing as more detailed than what I had. It would have a u32 bitmap + u32 bitmask. cheers, jamal